Future Societies: History, Social Philosophy (Coursework Sample)

Future Societies: History, Social Philosophy Student’s Name Department, University Course Professor’s Name Date Future Societies: History, Social Philosophy 1 What is Haran’s justification/evidence for the following statement – why are they imagined? “The nation is the imagined community of the state. The consumer tribe is the imagined community of the market.” In his book Sapiens: A Brief History of Human Kind, historian Yuval Noah Harari postulates the rise of imagined communities in the current dispensation and gives an example of these imagined communities as the nation and the consumer tribe. Harari (2014, p. 406) argues, "The nation is the imagined community of the state. The consumer tribe is the imagined community of the market." Of course, these imagined communities have posed as a replacement for the traditional family and community where people were tied together with close family and community bonds, culture, norms, ideals, and practices. Indeed, a human person is often referred to as a social animal because they thrive in ties. However, the traditional ties in terms of tribes and communities were not beneficial to the state; first and foremost, people were undoubtedly divided into small groups that were ungovernable and that pursued diversity of interests. In order to govern a large group of people, millions and not hundreds, the state imagined a nation as an instrument to bind a large pool of people into an imaginable community. The goal, therefore, was for the pursuance and success of state interests, whether political or economic. The same applies to the market, which reimagines and dictates consumerism trends. For example, it is common for the market to establish specific trends of fashion that the people embrace as a tribe of consumption. The teens would embrace a given brand of shoes as fashionable and thereby feel that they belong to a classy group when they wear such shoes. Those youths that wear them would feel that they belong to a particular group and therefore have an identity. However, this is only for consumption; it is a consumer tribe without any strings attached. Whereas the state imagines the nation for control and its political and economic posterity, the market also creates the consumer tribe purely for corporate interests and success. 2 What is/are the main argument/s that Harari puts forward in the section ″The Collapse of the Family and Community″ (p.398 - 405)? Do you agree with the characterization of the role of states, markets, and individuals defined by the section? Why or why not? Harari’s main argument is about the centrality of family and communal relationships in social and economic development. For example, Harari (2014, p. 398-399) says, "Prior to the Industrial Revolution, the daily life of most humans ran its course within three ancient frames: the nuclear family, the extended family, and the local intimate community." Families were indeed critical in lives of individuals in terms of support, relationships, identity, and belonging. I partly agree with Harari’s characterization of the role of the states, markets, and individuals as defined in the section. However, there are positions that I cannot entirely agree with. Indeed, I agree that within the traditional setup, the family that included the nuclear and extended relatives was more responsible. Even the community was also more responsible. They shared responsibilities in nurturing and even forging for the well-being of one another. However, today, this seems inexistent. This is why Harari states, 'the collapse of the family and the community. In my view, however, the kind and extent of collapse that Harari is postulating are not correct. We still have nuclear and extended families today and even very strong communities. Although the dynamics of industrialization have brought a new norm of life, saying that the family and communities have collapsed would be more imaginary too. In fact, what is happening today in this industrial era is what Harari (2014, p. 401) says about past families "Life in the bosom of family and community was far from ideal." Even today, it is just that life in family and community is far from perfect because of a host of challenges and not that these systems collapsed. I agree that that state indeed played a key role in creating a nation and nationhood because this is the only way it controls the people. This is why the state fostered integration, intermarrying and departing from tribal and traditional customs and traditions. However, I do not believe that this departure was exclusively the work of the state alone; there were also era-related forces that fostered the integration of communities. 3 Examine Zuboff′s arguments in ″The Two Modernities″. What does the author mean by ′individualization′, and how did it progress or change between the first and the second modernity? How do you feel about Zuboff′s narrative? Do you agree or disagree, and why? In understanding individualization, Zuboff begins first by defining what it is not. In particular, Zuboff indicates that individualization “Should not be confused with the neoliberal ideology of individualism” (p. 38). Individualism, of course, is the tendency for independence, self-reliance, and self-determination in excluding others. Individualism is a kind of self-centeredness that, as Zuboff (2019, p. 38) alludes, "Shifts all responsibility for success or failure to a mythical, atomized, isolated individual, doomed to a life of perpetual competition and disconnected from relationships, community, and society." This is not what Zuboff envisages individualization to be. On the contrary, for Zuboff, individualization has a positive connotation. Individualization is the desire for everyone to better his or her life. This kind of betterment could vary among people depending on everyone's needs. Individualization is that inclination for people to pursue their needs without necessarily competing with one another but in a way that acknowledges other people's differences. For example, affluent people may need to use the latest automobile model or iPhone for business purposes. Of course, they can purchase it. Their interests are vested inexpensive gadgets, while others may be inclined toward art and fashion. Each of these classes of people is not competing, but they are pursuing their different goals based on their needs. This, of course, as Zuboff examples, is "A consequence of long-term processes of modernization” (p. 39). Further, Zuboff argues about the basic nature of humanity, which is a characterization of the human need to live an effective life. This is the desire to better the human condition. The desire for a better life possibly drove innovation and technological advancement. The same desire in people during the time of Ford did not stop there but is also evident in the second modernity with the quest for electric de...